I always figured the reason judges and employers liked people on Law Review or other journals was because they figure those people are willing to undergo excessive unpleasantness in the name of ambition?

I think it shows a mindless devotion to tradition for traditionís sake thus firms are assured that you wonít think for yourself, youíll just follow the herd and do as youíre told. Breaking the mold or being original is bad for firm culture.

I always figured the reason judges and employers liked people on Law Review or other journals was because they figure those people are willing to undergo excessive unpleasantness in the name of ambition?

I think it shows a mindless devotion to tradition for traditionís sake thus firms are assured that you wonít think for yourself, youíll just follow the herd and do as youíre told. Breaking the mold or being original is bad for firm culture.

I always figured the reason judges and employers liked people on Law Review or other journals was because they figure those people are willing to undergo excessive unpleasantness in the name of ambition?

I think it shows a mindless devotion to tradition for traditionís sake thus firms are assured that you wonít think for yourself, youíll just follow the herd and do as youíre told. Breaking the mold or being original is bad for firm culture.

Doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of employers to see it. Do you really think the opposite is the case?

And, no offense, but it's still just "some story." Two judges isn't exactly a trend. And, more importantly, law review is going to be less important to federal circuit judges, and even federal district court judges to an extent, because the vast majority of the serious candidates were on law review. Those judges need something else to help make their determinations, so law review becomes "less important" relatively. But if we're talking about most clerkships, or most medium/larger law firms, it's pretty much indisputable that it's a great thing to have on one's resume.

Doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of employers to see it. Do you really think the opposite is the case?

And, no offense, but it's still just "some story." Two judges isn't exactly a trend. And, more importantly, law review is going to be less important to federal circuit judges, and even federal district court judges to an extent, because the vast majority of the serious candidates were on law review. Those judges need something else to help make their determinations, so law review becomes "less important" relatively. But if we're talking about most clerkships, or most medium/larger law firms, it's pretty much indisputable that it's a great thing to have on one's resume.

What will they look at? Grades? Sheeeeet.

I'm sure it depends on the judge. One judge on the 6th Circuit supposedly looks for as much extracurricular involvement as possible. His philosophy is it's "easy" to get awesome grades if you didn't do any other activities in law school.